[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 176 (Tuesday, November 5, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6375-S6376]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                                 Trade

  Now I want to turn to trade legislation, and I will not be as long on 
this point as I was on prescription drugs.
  When I resumed chairmanship of the Senate Finance Committee in 
January, I laid out my top priorities for the committee's work.
  For international trade, my agenda included reviewing section 232 of 
the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows the President, without 
any input

[[Page S6376]]

from Congress, to impose tariffs in the name of national security.
  For 11 months now, I have been working with other Finance Committee 
members on both sides of the aisle to establish a separation of powers 
and checks and balances in the section 232 process. These two basic 
principles of our system of government are sorely lacking in section 
232 as it stands today.
  Two of my colleagues on the Finance Committee, Senators Toomey and 
Portman, each filed reform bills that are well thought out, and both 
happen to be bipartisan. A full quarter of the Senate has cosponsored 
one or more of their bills, including 10 Democrats, 14 Republicans, and 
1 Independent.
  Many other Senators have told me that they, too, want to see section 
232 reforms reported out of the Finance Committee.
  With a strong bipartisan mandate like that, I have been optimistic 
that Ranking Member Wyden and I can reconcile the Toomey and Portman 
bills and hold a markup. More than once I have spoken publicly about my 
intentions to do just that.
  However, every time we get close to marking up a section 232 bill, 
Senator Wyden hears from stakeholders who are profiting from tariff 
production. Meanwhile, I get calls from colleagues who say something 
like this, and I am paraphrasing: Mr. Chairman, the President won't 
like us taking away his tariff law, and we don't want to make the 
President upset.
  Well, we hear that a lot, whether we have a Republican or Democratic 
President, on a whole lot of other issues. But we don't have to listen 
to the President of the United States. We are Members of an independent 
branch of government, able to do our own thing--work with the President 
when we can and not worry about the President when we can't.
  Well, allow me to set the record straight on a few things that I have 
just set before you so far.
  First, as I have said before, reforming section 232 is not about 
President Trump. Reforming section 232 means acknowledging that the 
87th Congress handed President Jack Kennedy enormous authority over 
trade in 1962 at the height of the Cold War. President Trump was merely 
following that 1962 law.
  In the process, he alerted us to the fact that Congress has been too 
negligent in the past in protecting our constitutional responsibility 
of lawmaking. Our Founding Fathers were explicit in tasking Congress 
with responsibility over international trade, and it is time now to 
rebalance section 232 in line with the Founding Fathers' clear 
intentions.
  Secondly, I have been clear that I am generally not a fan of tariffs, 
but I also want to make clear that I have agreed to Senator Wyden's 
request to introduce a chairman and ranking member's mark that does not 
unwind section 232 measures on steel and aluminum. Many problems with 
those tariffs and quotas have been well documented, but I have been in 
the Senate long enough to know that getting things done requires 
compromise.
  Third, and to all of my colleagues and everyone listening, I don't 
view 232 reforms as weakening the power of the Chief Executive. I view 
them as enhancing the effectiveness of the Chief Executive in our 
country. As the Supreme Court told President Truman, the Office of 
President and the President himself are strongest when Congress is 
behind him.
  We need reforms to section 232 that will make clearer where Congress 
stands on national security and trade. Such reforms would also make 
clearer to our trading partners that when section 232 is used, Congress 
stands with the President.
  Now, with these points cleared up, I hope that Ranking Member Wyden, 
members of the Finance Committee, and our House colleagues will be 
ready to reform section 232.
  We have a strong, bipartisan mandate to get to work, and this is 
likely just the beginning of a great deal of work that needs to be done 
to review our trade laws.
  Senator Wyden and I have reported bipartisan bills out of the 
committee successfully in the past, and hopefully we can do it again 
for section 232.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Blackburn). The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.